Visitor Minimum Ages

Webmaster Discussion
#1

I just got this email from Google+:

Dear Google+ user,
We’re making some changes to Google+ Pages so that users like you can better control who sees their content.
As part of this process, we’ve upgraded your account so you can now:

• Apply specific age restrictions on a country-by-country basis
• Change or remove previous restrictions at any time

To review or change your current settings, please log in to your account. You can check these same settings for any of the other pages that you own.

If your settings remain unchanged by June 6, 2014, we’ll continue to only show your Google+ posts to users that are at least 18 years old. Note that these restrictions may extend to additional forms of content in the future.

For more information on age or country targeting, please visit our Help Center.

Thanks,
The Google+ Team

That made me think - what age are you supposed to pick? There’s the age of consent (in some places it’s as low as 14). There’s the age where you can be in porn (typically 18, but lower in places like Scandinavia). Then there the age when you can view porn (isn’t that 21 in many places?). And then there are issues like people who are convicted of certain crimes who aren’t allowed to look at porn at all.

I’ve never understood how someone could be in a video at 18, but not allowed to watch the video until they’re 21. Can someone please explain that to me? Or, how exactly does porn do more harm to a 16 year old than the video game they’ve been playing since age 10 where they go around shooting people (complete with blood splatter).

God, I hate the puritanical streak in Western culture - and that’s nothing in comparison to all the sharia bullshit in the Muslim countries.

I’ve always just said “18” and been done with it (with a caveat about how the age may be higher in their area, etc.) But with Google+ and Facebook they don’t allow porn, so it would make sense to lower the age, right? I mean with COPPA it’s 14+, right? (or is it 13?) IMHO, it’s sorta silly that a guy in underwear would be marked “sensitive content” and age restricted in the first place. I mean even discussion of sex has to be done “gingerly” on sites like that so there really isn’t anything all that extreme for a teen to encounter on those sites. (Though I can see where you might not want a 9 year old coming across discussion of sex). But if it’s just non-suggestive pictures of hot guys in underwear - what’s the harm?

Before any of you pounce on me, this post has been a bit rambling and unfocused. I didn’t necessarily say what you might think I said - so be gentle in your responses. My guiding principle is that violent content is more harmful than sexual, but we live in a world where violence is perfectly OK but sex is evil. That makes things a bit confusing - especially when it’s things like discussions about sex, and pics that merely glorify the male body.

So what are your age standards for porn sites? And what about social media sites which don’t have pornographic content, but may have sexual discussion or innuendo?

#2

Re: Visitor Minimum Ages

we always stick to 18 as a general consensus age, social media like facebook can be even more worrying, we recently started only posting ‘above the waist’ pictures as we were being clobbered by reports of inappropriate content even for guys in speedos and no hardons…

#3

Re: Visitor Minimum Ages

I understand where you’re coming from and why you made that decision, but it’s sad to think that a gay kid can’t see pics of shirtless guys until he’s 18. Is there any potentially inappropriate discussion on your FB page?

#4

Re: Visitor Minimum Ages

I just had one other thought… Does that email mean that as of June 6 my G+ pages won’t be accessible to the general public - that they’ll require a Google login? If so, does that mean that racier content will be allowed on G+ pages - maybe a bit more like Twitter?

#5

Re: Visitor Minimum Ages

To me it just sounds like how facebook works, where the user has to be over 18 to access and those pages are blocked unless you are signed in. However with Facebook that does not mean you can put up more hardcore stuff, they will still delete your page even if you show the slightest nudity.

I’ve never either known what age one is supposed to use as a guideline. 18 years is where I’m from so I stick with that, can’t see it making any difference.

#6

Re: Visitor Minimum Ages

It says a lot that many of us have no clue how to properly handle this situation - we just sorta stab in the dark and hope we come close to “right”.

Some pages on Facebook are open to the general public (e.g. my Male Prime page), others aren’t (e.g. Gay Demon, rawTOP, etc.). I guess, since they’re so tight with visual nudity standards (I got a warning for a pic of a bikini that was just slightly see-through when wet - it just showed ass cheek, not dick), that the difference between public and age restricted with login comes down to the nature of the discussion on the page, not what you see in the pics. If that’s the case, shouldn’t say a 16 year old be able to see discussions about sex? For example IRMA - the people who are advocating for rectal microbicides - why shouldn’t a gay teen be able to see discussions of the ways researchers are trying to make sex safer? Would a discussion of PrEP be blocked from them? With stuff like PrEP they need to see that to make an informed decision while they’re experimenting sexually. But what is the proper cut off for stuff like that? 16? 15? 17? There are no clear guidelines. I guess, unlike Facebook, Google+ is giving you control to do what you think is best. But what standards will they use to moderate things when someone objects to your page?